New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-08-19
LAMAR'S LAND DECISION.
MAINLY A BID FOR VOTES.
THE BANKS LAWYERS SURE THAT THEY CAN PROVE
THE CHARGES AGAINST HIN.

A LAWYERS COMMENTS ON Tue INDEMNITY LANDS
Observation-Disclosures LOSS AND INJUSTICE.
| lBY TELEGRAPH TO THE TRIBUNE
| WAsUISGroN Aug l8-In conversation with lawyer
yesterday who has devoted many years to the study OF
the land laws OF the United States well to the rail-
road land grant question, The TRIBUNE correspondents
! asked:
What do you think Of Secretary Lanars docson re-
storg the indemnity lands OF the Atlantic aud Pacihc
Company TO entry under the settlement aws!"
The lawyer replied "Oh, it's clearly political move
designed help Cleveland in certain quarters There Is
sincerity In It, 1t Is the hand OF Lamar and tile voice
OF Cleveland The administration of Commissioners
Sparks has had the effect Of arrayng the settlers on tile
public lands sodly agains the Administration without
regard 10 past present party affiliations
and 1t had become party necessity
to conciate this class of voters, and the
cheapest easiest way do 1t the expense Of
the land grant railroads You may remember that Mr..
Sparks had been Office thirty days whom he issued
order suspendng the issuing OF land patents oil
settlers CLAIMS That order was followed by official
report to Congress in which It stated that 90 per
cent of the land entries made by settlers fraudulent
which equivalent to saying that these settlers were
consprators and peEurers and this in followed
by attempt the part OF Mr. Sparks TO suspend the
operation of all the settlement laws enacted by Congress
Special have been employed to make secret nyes
legations OF settlers claims and vast numbers OF entries
have been cancelled the reports OF these secret agents.
and tho purchase money paid by the settlers for
their lands has been eonfscated. This has made
the administration OF tho land department very unpopu
lar In the West and 1t necessary that the Admnis
tration should do something TO retrieve its mistake
"What will be the practical result Of the decisionP
at will result the practical destruction Of the rights
Of that company to the lands lying within the indemnity
nits II should be remembered that the delay select
ing tho lands been caused by the failure OF the United
States TO survey the lands the line or the constructed
road. Lands in the indemnity limits OF railroad
cannot be selected until they surveyed because the
law does not permit the selection OF unsurveyed lands
and the lands lying within the granted limits must be
surveyed before II can be ascertained whether any
tracts which would otherwise the road are
occupied by settlers otherwise lost TO the grant
Millions of OF lands lying within the earned part OF
this railroad grant been surveyed and hence
Il has been absolutely impossible for the company TO
select them and the fault lies with the Government and
with the company. All OF the unsurysyei and I'M
settled lands however subject 10 settlement under
the Presumption and Homestead laws, and hence these
lands will Immediately be taken up by settlers and the
object the grant will be defeated The argument OF
Mr. Lamar that tho lands should be restored because the
road built within the time prescribed by law Is
sngulary weak when viewed In the light OF the decision
of Supreme Court OF the United States in the OF
schnlenberg against Hartman, In which 1t was decided
unmpalred in tho grantee until 1t forfeited by
act OF Congress or the Judgment OF court No such or
the contract is AS good now as twas
when it was nrst made. Mr. Lamar himself so decided
Land Company August 20, 1856 Several MILLIONS OF
selected in lieu OF other lands lost n the
granted limits MI L3mars decision will open up those
selected lands to settlement, aud will involve the CON-
pany in expensive aud unnecessary litigation with every
man who applies TO enter them under tue
right 10 them The supreme Court has decided
several occasions that the right Of iarOad to the
selected by the company In part satisfaction OF tae
road Company" Railroad against Herring Railroad
against Railroad. and stPaul and Sioux city Railroad
against Wlnona and 81 Peter Railroad" all which were
decided within the past few years Moreover the rec
the General Land Oice will in all cases show the
are prior IN date To the settlement claim expensive
contest as provided for in Mt Lamars decision y entire
y unnecessary for the question OF priority OF right ana
the regularity OF the selection can be determined ~
The lawyer continued: "There are two three
other phases OF this matter which l wiz mention.
made by Congress was 70 give TO the rail
roads certain number OF OF land per mile, and in
order make up that amount is always necessary 10
20 into the indemnity limits get the prescribed guam
tty but the decision Secretary Lamar will prevent
the companies from obtaining the amount OF lands 70
which they are entitled by law Nearly every lana
grant railroad in tho country has been compelled issue
bonds secured by lien on us aas ana ese p ,h
try by banks collateral security tor loans and by
executors and administrators ior minor chldren IL Is
needless to say that the action OF Mr. Lamar
viii destroy seriously impair the
value OF these securities which now in the
hands of innocent holders FOR value The popular dea
seems 10 be that land grant railroads are not entted 10
gift from the Government. This Is very far from
tho truth. In all cases where the Government made
grants railroads OF the alternate oddnumbered sec
ions. 1t immediately doubled the price OF the adjoining
sections and tho settlers who purchased
the numbe red sections from the Government
actually reimbursed to tho full value o. the granted
lands the Government in reality did rot lose any
thing by the grants. All land grants contain condition
that tho United states mails. Army and other supple:
shall be transported at such price may be fed
by law. For many years the Government paid but
nifty cents on tho dollar OF tho Tegu-
lar tariff rates and 10 now pays but eighty
the do for the transportation OF the mails
When Is considered that this deduction is TO continue
long the railroads exist It will be seen that the Gov
eminent derives great advantages from land grants,
which cost II nothing.
Instead OF having their lands conhscated the owners
land grant bonds entitled 10 fair treatment At
the hands OF the United states. The administration OF
lr Sparks has destroyed the confidence OF the settler
class In the Administration and the decision OF MT La
quito likely TO destroy the confidence OF good
many other people. / do not mean railroad magnateS
bankers any than mean small investors all
over the country who hold bonds predicatcd on land
grants The aggressons OF this Administration upon the
rights OF property we'll calculated to excite socitude
in the minds Of all thoughtful men,"